Performance of dynamically installed anchors subjected to vertical and inclined cyclic loading in clay: experimental investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anchors employed in offshore floating systems may experience “cyclic fatigue” due to strain-softening of the seabed soil under long-term cyclic loading. The reconsolidation of the soil during the cyclic loading process however will potentially improve the anchor stability over the entire life cycle. In this study, a series of laboratory model tests with ultra-high cycle numbers (∼106) were conducted to investigate the impact on the stability of a newly developed multi-line anchor of cyclic loading levels, uplift angles, and anchor types. Test results find that the critical uplift loading avoiding the “cyclic-induced fatigue failure” of the anchor is ∼0.6 Fu, m ( Fu, m is the ultimate monotonic uplift capacity) under vertical loading and is ∼0.7 Fu, m for the anchor under 45° inclined loading. The post-cyclic monotonic uplift capacity exhibits an increase of 10%–70% compared with that in the monotonic uplift test, indicating the reconsolidated effect of the soil is beneficial for improving the anchor stability. Multi-amplitude cyclic tests find that previous loading procedures with relatively small-amplitude loading levels can restrain the accumulation of the uplift displacement during the subsequent loading procedure with relatively high-amplitude loading levels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".